A Rose is a Rose, by Any Other Name

The Christian Science Monitor writes about a new "data-collection system that could troll news, blogs, even emails" and asks the question, "Will it go too far?"in an article entitled US plans massive data sweep, reporting:

The US government is developing a massive computer system that can collect huge amounts of data and, by linking far-flung information from blogs and e-mail to government records and intelligence reports, search for patterns of terrorist activity.

* * * *

"We don't realize that, as we live our lives and make little choices, like buying groceries, buying on Amazon, Googling, we're leaving traces everywhere," says Lee Tien, a staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "We have an attitude that no one will connect all those dots. But these programs are about connecting those dots - analyzing and aggregating them - in a way that we haven't thought about. It's one of the underlying fundamental issues we have yet to come to grips with."

The core of this effort is a little-known system called Analysis, Dissemination, Visualization, Insight, and Semantic Enhancement (ADVISE).

ADVISE involves data-mining or "dataveillance," as it is now being called. Give you a sense of Deja vu, perhaps? It should. Think TIA redux. Remember TIA, Total Information Awareness?

Privacy concerns have torpedoed federal data-mining efforts in the past. In 2002, news reports revealed that the Defense Department was working on Total Information Awareness, a project aimed at collecting and sifting vast amounts of personal and government data for clues to terrorism. An uproar caused Congress to cancel the TIA program a year later.

ADVISE "looks very much like TIA," Mr. Tien of the Electronic Frontier Foundation writes in an e-mail. "There's the same emphasis on broad collection and pattern analysis."

Gonzo 2-fer

It's Friday, so it's time for watching a few good video clips. The Daily Show and The Colbert Report both do take-offs on the Attorney General's appearance at the NSA Hearings. Enjoy!

Crooks and Liars: Glower of Attorney

onegoodmove: Real Science

Best line: Pat Leahy: "Of course, I'm sorry Mr. Attorney General, I forgot you can't anwer any questions that might be relevant to this."

Truth in Reporting?

Dan Froomkin's column, White House Briefing, in the Washington Post, discusses a journalistic faux pas by Time magazine in the Plame leak scandal. As Froomkin explains:

Media Matters , the liberal media watchdog Web site, raises an interesting point about Time Magazine's coverage of the Valerie Plame affair.

Back in this October 2003 story, the magazine reported: "White House spokesman Scott McClellan said accusations of Rove's peddling information are 'ridiculous.' Says McClellan: 'There is simply no truth to that suggestion.'"

It is now clear that several reporters and editors at Time knew very well that McClellan's statement was false.

Media Matters writes: "But despite that knowledge, they participated in the publication of an article containing that quote, with no indication that it was untrue. They participated in the publication of that article, which, in reporting that 'Rove was initially accused by Wilson of being the man behind the leak,' implied that Rove was no longer under suspicion -- even though they all knew that Rove was, in fact, [Matt] Cooper's source."

Is there any excuse for a news organization to print a statement that they know is untrue, without at least trying to clue their readers into the truth? That seems to defeat the central purpose of journalism.

So what should Time have done? One option might have been to go to Rove and say: We know McClellan isn't telling the truth. You either need to tell us the truth, on the record, or tell him the truth.

What if Rove had refused? One option might have been to go to McClellan and tell him that they had reason to think his statement was not accurate.

And if McClellan brushed them off? They should have stopped at nothing until they found a way to report what they knew to be the truth.

This should be a major embarrassment for Time, but sad to say, I don't think it is. To the contrary, in the age of "Truthiness" it hasn't even gotten much, if any, "press" in the media. How can a reporter intentionally withhold information which the reporter personally knows proves the premise of the article to be untrue? Is this omission substantially different than plagiarism or other ethical lapses that journalists have engaged in in recent time? In the end, in each of these instances, the reader is mislead by the reporter.

We are living in an age where everything is categorized as partisan. There are no plain, unvarnished, truthful facts anymore. Spin has been elevated to an art form. Everything has to have a bias, everyone has an agenda. Journalists have allowed themselves to be dragged into this game. There is the so-called "liberal media" in print and on TV and talk radio, right wing pundits abound. The result is that overall, journalism suffers, because it's credibility is compromised.

Shame on Time.

Family Time

Time to go:

Claude Allen, President Bush's principle domestic policy adviser, has resigned. A White House spokesman told the Chicago Tribune that Allen wanted to spend more time with his family.

Republicans who know Allen are uncertain why he stepped down so suddenly. Late last week, he was in good spirits as he briefed allies and surrogates about the President's State of the Union message. On Tuesday, he attended a conference in PA on the president's faith based initiative.

Allen enjoys a warm relationship with moral conservative groups in Washington. As a senior political appointee at the Department of Health and Human services, he was the administration's point person on abstinence initiatives.

(Via Eschaton)

"Moral" and conservative Bush appointee leaves job rather quickly "for family reasons."

Let's guess. Will it be an indictment or a sex scandal? My bet is the latter.

Cartoon of the Day

*Signe Wilkinson, Phila Daily News 

Bye Bye Bill

Or, as the Philadelphia Daily News put it, Scranton sings his Swann song.

Not suprisingly, Bill Scranton has dropped out of the Republican race for Governor of Pennsylvania. The only surprise is that he was pressured to do so even before the Republican State Committee endorsement, which was to occur this week-end.

Usually, the pull out happens shortly after the party selection, when great pressure is brought to bear on the unendorsed candidate. After all, for Republicans, it is a section, not an election, process. Why have two fellow Republicans contesting each other, with voters choosing the candidate? The party knows best and should decide on the candidate to run in the general election against those nasty Democrats.

I fully expected Scranton to drop out, the timing is the only part that is unusual. Can't have a future in the party if you don't fall in line, after all.

Cartoon of the Day

*Ward Sutton, Village Voice 

The End is Near?

As we get into the NSA hearings, a recent piece by Martin Garbus in the Huffington Post, How Close Are We to the End of Democracy? provides perspective on what's at stake:

We have today seen President Bush's legal defense for the surveillance program. There is, he tells us, an unparalled crisis.

* * * *

There is no crisis today that justifies suspending the constitution. There is a constitution in effect today. That constitution has endured for over 200 years.

* * * *

No president in over 200 years of our history has ever before claimed the "unitary powers" that Bush claims are his. Not President Lincoln during the Civil War, not President Wilson during World War I, not President Roosevelt during World War II, not President Truman during Korea, and not Presidents Johnson and Nixon during Vietnam.

Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, and James Madison all saw the danger -- they never arrogated that power to the presidency.

* * * *

The President claims that he has the right to interpret laws "in a manner consistent with the Constitutional authority of the President to supervise the unitary executive branch and as the Commander-in-Chief and consistent with constitutional limitations on judicial power."

Bush bridled when asked by a reporter if "unchecked" presidential powers were dictatorial, angrily said, "I disagree with your view of unchecked power. There is the check of people being sworn to uphold the law for starters. There is oversight. We're talking to Congress all the time . . . to say unchecked powers is to ascribe dictatorial powers to the president, to which I object."

His objection is dishonest.

What does "unitary powers" mean? It means that if the President alone decides that the country is faced with what he alone defines to be a critical problem, his authority is unchecked. In other words, he decides where the powers lies in the Constitution -- he decides the contour of his power. This sounds more like a monarchy, more like authoritarianism than a democracy.

The taking of this power is not a coup d'état because the people today have the power of the vote in 2008. But it is dangerously close on that path -- the Founders recognized the danger of a too-powerful President.

* * * *

Samuel Alito, John Roberts (in his Circuit Court decisions), Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, and wunderkind John Yoo give the President unchecked domestic and foreign powers to create that world. Bush can start his own wars, preemptive or otherwise, is the ultimate interpreter of foreign treaties, he defines enemy combatants as he wishes, he detains prisoners for as long as he wishes, he continues surveillance on foreign intercepts for as long as he wishes, he tortures as he wishes, he can ignore Congressional directives and statutes such as those creating FISA, as well as essential elements of our Constitution.

This litany has no end. We cannot now anticipate all the ramifications of the "unitary" president and his claim of "inherent powers," except that it clearly allows him to fully take over the government.

* * * *

The Bush Administration ignore centuries of Constitutional decision-making that limits the President, decisions during the Civil War, World War II, World War II and the Korean, Vietnamese and Cold Wars. In the unlikely event the new Supreme Court does not give him all he wants, he will ignore those decisions as well.

That is truly what a "unitary" president means. If America did not pay attention before, it must now.

Cartoon of the Day

*Drew Sheneman

Quote of the Day

"The enemy isn't conservatism. The enemy isn't liberalism. The enemy is bullshit."
-Lars-Erik Nelson

I always knew that George Bush was enemy # 1.

Hahbahtdem Stillers

This blogger, a former Pittsburgher, reminisces What Steelers Mean to Pittsburgh---and PA Governor Race at Daily Kos. He brings back a lot of fond memories of my days in Pittsburgh as he discusses the Steelers and Pittsburgh in the 70s and 80s (the time I was there), and about how Pittsburgh suffered a great decline in the mid-80s, after the steel mills closed, which is when we left. I was surprised to see that during this period, the city also lost half it's population. It's an interesting read.

Also, he has posted some great Steeler's Super Bowl pictures at his website: Dreaming Up Daily. Steeler fans should check them out.

His post also discusses former Steeler Lynn Swann, who is the likely Republican-anointed Candidate for Governor of Pennsylvania. The man is lucky. Steeler mania is publicity you can't buy. Makes me worry for Ed. Rendell is the type of man I hate to love, but I must admit that he won me over during his years as Mayor of Philly. He certainly has his foibles, but he did a damn good job making Philly a better place. I also think he's done a good job as Governor in a difficult environment, with a republican controlled legislature more interested in making him look bad than doing what's right for the state. More to come on this topic as the race progresses.

Thumb's Up

The WINNERS!!!
It was a long time coming, but well worth the wait.
Go Pittsburgh!

Cartoon of the Day

*m.e. Cohen

From the City of Brotherly Love

Here's to the Steelers in the Super Bowl (at least from 1 of the 2 Steeler fans in Philly). We lived in Pittsburgh for 10 years (law school and several years beyond in the early 80's) and were there for 3 of the 4 Super Bowl Wins.

I'm not a sports fan, Lord knows, but I still remember the phrase "One for the Thumb." Maybe the Thumb will finally get it today.

We've adorned the sunroom of our house (see picture) with Steeler paraphernalia for my husband, a big Steelers fan. Of course, since most of Philly hates Pittsburgh (and the Steelers), we don't dare hang a "Terrible Towel" in the window.

Libby Lies about his Lies

Since we're on the subject of the Plame case, Richard Schmitt of the Baltimore Sun has an "amusing" article, Libby's defense points to distraction, regarding indicted VP Chief of Staff, Scooter Libby.

As chief of staff to one of the most powerful figures on Earth, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby was immersed in some of the most sensitive and weighty matters affecting the nation.

Now Libby is seeking to use the profundity of his former responsibilities as a mitigating factor as he prepares for a criminal trial in the unmasking of former CIA operative Valerie Plame. Libby contends that any alleged lack of truth-telling was inadvertent, the product of his own preoccupation with life-and-death matters of state.

It's a provocative strategy that some experts say could rub a jury the wrong way by suggesting that he is above the law.

What a novel concept. I guess it's the "Circle of Executive Power" theory. That is, not only does the President have unfettered authority, but it extends to his favored minions as well. Perhaps he puts together a Circle List of those annointed with the Power.

Cartoon of the Day

(Gee, I wonder who that reminds me of)

*Randy Bish, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review 

Political Earthquake

Former Prosecutor Elizabeth de la Vega has written a Commentary in Mother Jones, When Two Worlds Collide, dissecting the state of the Plame CIA outing investigation. She believes, and I concur, that Karl Rove will be indicted for his role in the scandal. The only question is when, not if. Her comparison of Rove and Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald is perfectly on target. She notes:

In the world of campaign politics that Rove has so long inhabited, smears and personal attacks are designed to seem as if they were spontaneously generated. They can then wander around, undirected, until they finally curl up in America's living rooms like so many mysterious, uninvited guests. These intruders may be rude and destructive, but no one is supposed to be able to get rid of them, in part because no one is supposed to be able to sort out or pinpoint how they got there in the first place. Thus, although Karl Rove has lurked in the background of an unprecedented number of whisper and smear campaigns -- that, for instance, John McCain had an illegitimate child (a rumor spread during the Republican primaries that preceded the 2000 election), or that former Texas Governor Ann Richards was a lesbian (a persistent rumor that was spread during Bush's Texas gubernatorial campaign) -- he has never been held accountable. And that is a state of affairs to which Rove became accustomed.

Rove has escaped responsibility for his sneaky campaign tricks because the candidates for whom he has worked -- most prominently, George Bush -- have had a stunning ability to accept, unquestioningly, the miraculous appearance of information that takes down their opponents. They had no problem about endorsing brazen dishonesty or the least interest in ferreting out bad actors in their camps. At the same time, opposing candidates have had neither the resources, nor the time to fully
investigate the attacks before plummeting in the polls. Afterwards, of course, it was already far too late.

* * * *

[The investigation of Rove] also opened a window into the world of a President's key adviser who never left campaign mode and who had never before been tripped up, no matter what he did. Such a man would be quite unprepared for an investigator like Fitzgerald who operates under a very different timetable and in a world ordered by radically different rules.

Her conclusion is that "it would be most surprising if when his world and Fitzgerald's collide, the result isn't a political earthquake. The moment an earthquake arrives remains impossible to predict, but it would be surprising if, in the CIA leak case, the impact of a Rove indictment did not cause massive aftershocks."

I guess we're talking Big Bang "Theory" Redux.

Science, Intelligent Design Style

The NYT has a follow up article on NASA's public affairs office trying to control the dissemination of scientific intormation from the Agency, in NASA Chief Backs Agency Openness. In one instance:

In October, for example, George Deutsch, a presidential appointee in NASA headquarters, told a Web designer working for the agency to add the word "theory" after every mention of the Big Bang, according to an e-mail message from Mr. Deutsch that another NASA employee forwarded to The Times.

* * * *

The Big Bang memo came from Mr. Deutsch, a 24-year-old presidential appointee in the press office at NASA headquarters whose résumé says he was an intern in the "war room" of the 2004 Bush-Cheney re-election campaign. A 2003 journalism graduate of Texas A&M, he was also the public-affairs officer who sought more control over Dr. Hansen's public statements.

In October 2005, Mr. Deutsch sent an e-mail message to Flint Wild, a NASA contractor working on a set of Web presentations about Einstein for middle-school students. The message said the word "theory" needed to be added after every mention of the Big Bang.

The Big Bang is "not proven fact; it is opinion," Mr. Deutsch wrote, adding, "It is not NASA's place, nor should it be to make a declaration such as this about the existence of the universe that discounts intelligent design by a creator."

It continued: "This is more than a science issue, it is a religious issue. And I would hate to think that young people would only be getting one-half of this debate from NASA. That would mean we had failed to properly educate the very people who rely on us for factual information the most."

This comes out a week after it was reported that James Hansen, a top NASA climate scientist, revealed that "the Bush administration has tried to stop him from speaking out since he gave a lecture last month calling for prompt reductions in emissions of greenhouse gases linked to global warming." See: Climate Expert Says NASA Tried to Silence Him.

(Via Eschaton)

Additional information on George Deutsch can be found at World O'Crap.

Curious George

This one is priceless. The Philadelphia Daily News' Will Bunch, who blogs via Attytood, captured this picture of an upcoming movie posted on billboards around Philly.

As he aptly observes: Irony, thy name is Curious George.

Life sure does imitate art. I wonder if "I Spy" is next.

Cartoon of the Day

*John Darkow